Iron Chef Optimization Challenge XI

[true_shinken]

Meh, the cats were away, so this mouse played. Now the big kids are back in town, so I'm not expecting first. I just want to toss up my silly ideas and see what everyone else came up with.

Dude, there's nothing wrong with being humble, but you are the standing champion. Everyone will be looking forward for your build.

[OMG PONIES]

Dude, there's nothing wrong with being humble, but you are the standing champion. Everyone will be looking forward for your build.

No pressure, right?

Haha, I have some ideas that should be fun to flesh out. Right now, I'm actually considering submitting three builds:
1. Actually aiming for power, elegance, and UoSI...but probably taking a hit in originality.
2. A build focused around a trick that was too fun to pass up, but doesn't even finish the secret ingredient.
3. Like above, but focused more on the concept than any particular tricks.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

No pressure, right?

None. At. ALL

[Lord Bingo]

Is Tome of Battle allowed?

[Keld Denar]

Encouraged, even! Just remember to adequately notate what manevuers you get and when, and even how they impact your build.

[Draz74]

The problem with Tome of Battle isn't that the contest or the judges don't like it ... the problem is that its classes are already very competent and versatile on their own, and if you want a good Use of Secret Ingredient score, you have to come up with something that has a reason to take Blade Bravo rather than taking more Tome of Battle levels.

[DaragosKitsune]

The problem with Tome of Battle isn't that the contest or the judges don't like it ... the problem is that its classes are already very competent and versatile on their own, and if you want a good Use of Secret Ingredient score, you have to come up with something that has a reason to take Blade Bravo rather than taking more Tome of Battle levels.

Couldn't put it better myself.

[BobVosh]

The problem with Tome of Battle isn't that the contest or the judges don't like it ... the problem is that its classes are already very competent and versatile on their own, and if you want a good Use of Secret Ingredient score, you have to come up with something that has a reason to take Blade Bravo rather than taking more Tome of Battle levels.

Also it can hurt you on power as well.

[Lord Bingo]

The problem with Tome of Battle isn't that the contest or the judges don't like it ... the problem is that its classes are already very competent and versatile on their own, and if you want a good Use of Secret Ingredient score, you have to come up with something that has a reason to take Blade Bravo rather than taking more Tome of Battle levels.

I'm not going to compete. I actually have a great build that uses the Blade Bravado lying around but I don't have the time or skills to write a piece of fiction to rival some of those I have seen here since I started lurking in this threat.
The reason I asked is because that personally I love ToB but I often encounter people who don't want it in their games.

[OMG PONIES]

Also it can hurt you on power as well.

Do you care to elaborate? Usually, I think Tome of Battle adds some power and versatility to a build.

[Amphetryon]

The problem with Tome of Battle isn't that the contest or the judges don't like it ... the problem is that its classes are already very competent and versatile on their own, and if you want a good Use of Secret Ingredient score, you have to come up with something that has a reason to take Blade Bravo rather than taking more Tome of Battle levels.

This is not a significantly different problem than that encountered with most caster classes and the PrCs we've seen before; many of them do quite well in Power and UoSI.

[BobVosh]

Do you care to elaborate? Usually, I think Tome of Battle adds some power and versatility to a build.

Don't get me wrong, ToB helps most martial characters. Just if you were a swordsage and you went into this class, I have to question how that is helpful. Therefore you lose on SI for going into it just for this competition, and power since you made a fairly suboptimal choice.

Although I guess warblade is probably more likely. Either way.

*edit* I feel like eleborating a little bit more on this. As I stated in my spoiler for judging, I will judge each character as what it is. A non-ToB martial class will be judged as such, taking levels in ToB classes will get you judged as a ToB martial class. So you will compete with all things within that tier.

[Amphetryon]

Don't get me wrong, ToB helps most martial characters. Just if you were a swordsage and you went into this class, I have to question how that is helpful. Therefore you lose on SI for going into it just for this competition, and power since you made a fairly suboptimal choice.

Although I guess warblade is probably more likely. Either way.

*edit* I feel like eleborating a little bit more on this. As I stated in my spoiler for judging, I will judge each character as what it is. A non-ToB martial class will be judged as such, taking levels in ToB classes will get you judged as a ToB martial class. So you will compete with all things within that tier.

That's a fairly specific warning away from a class, all told...

I guess I don't get why Swordsage is sub-optimal while Warblade is not. I don't think it's the BAB issue, since the Other Killer Gnome takes Rogue levels, but that was my first guess.

[BobVosh]

That's a fairly specific warning away from a class, all told...

I guess I don't get why Swordsage is sub-optimal while Warblade is not. I don't think it's the BAB issue, since the Other Killer Gnome takes Rogue levels, but that was my first guess.

I apologize that isn't what I intended. I mean switching from swordsage or warblade to blade bravo, unless something I don't immediately see, is suboptimal. None of the ToB classes seem to synergise well. I said what I did about warblade as it seems the most likely of the three main classes for blade bravo. I could of course be entirely wrong as I don't use ToB as a primary source for most characters.

Please feel free to use any and all of the ToB without fear that I will punish you for using those classes/maneuvers/feats/etc. I enjoy the book, but I will expect a decent reason for power of character as well as elegence for switching from a ToB class to blade bravo.

[OMG PONIES]

I think what he's saying is that, if you started off in Swordsage, he would dock you points for going into Blade Bravo solely because it's the Secret Ingredient, rather than continuing in swordsage. When it comes to power and UoSI, I disagree with this ruling, since there's a nice swordsage niche that Blade Bravo accentuates quite well.

[BobVosh]

I think what he's saying is that, if you started off in Swordsage, he would dock you points for going into Blade Bravo solely because it's the Secret Ingredient, rather than continuing in swordsage. When it comes to power and UoSI, I disagree with this ruling, since there's a nice swordsage niche that Blade Bravo accentuates quite well.

I also said unless there is something I miss, which is quite possible as it is not a first choice book of mine.

I really am sorry for mistyping as I apparently have managed to do on quite a scale. I guarantee that I will think out every post in this thread in more detail from now on.

[true_shinken]

I think what he's saying is that, if you started off in Swordsage, he would dock you points for going into Blade Bravo solely because it's the Secret Ingredient, rather than continuing in swordsage. When it comes to power and UoSI, I disagree with this ruling, since there's a nice swordsage niche that Blade Bravo accentuates quite well.

While I quite agree with you, OMG PONIES, every judge has the right to set his own standards for judging.

[OMG PONIES]

While I quite agree with you, OMG PONIES, every judge has the right to set his own standards for judging.

I agree with you. I was just stating what I interpreted BobVosh's statement to mean, and my own commentary.

The moral of the story? Use Tome of Battle, like anything else, at your own risk. Some people might have an aversion to seafood, while others might extol its virtues for days on end. Does that mean nobody should make lobster bisque? Hardly. Does it mean everyone should? Not at all.

[Keld Denar]

Mmmmm, Lobster Bisque. Any build that finds a way to send me Lobster Bisque through the intarwebz gets automatic straight 5s across the board.

What? I'm only human...or am I? Bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!

(And actually, Swordsage 2 is actually a VERY elegant dip IMO, if you space it out right. Some maneuvers don't scale well, but others scale VERY well. Just sayin...)

[The Vorpal Tribble]

*yawns at this talk of Tome of Battle*

[OMG PONIES]

Mmmmm, Lobster Bisque. Any build that finds a way to send me Lobster Bisque through the intarwebz gets automatic straight 5s across the board.

Must...develop...technology.

Now this makes me wary of whether I should incorporate ToB into any of my builds. As if I didn't have enough neuroses plaguing me!

[Keld Denar]

Shush up and update your game! Less slacking, more DMing!

[Draz74]

This is not a significantly different problem than that encountered with most caster classes and the PrCs we've seen before; many of them do quite well in Power and UoSI.

True ... many of them do. But some don't. I was trying to issue a quite mild warning. I actually hope we do see some builds in this contest that are spiced up with ToB. But to do well in UoSI, they'll have to do something clever to gain synergy between maneuvers and Blade Bravo.

[Lord Bingo]

(And actually, Swordsage 2 is actually a VERY elegant dip IMO, if you space it out right. Some maneuvers don't scale well, but others scale VERY well. Just sayin...)

That is how I would do it too but I would not call it elegant -you do it for power

[Amphetryon]

That is how I would do it too but I would not call it elegant -you do it for power

Some might call it elegant to do it that way, others would call the same structure inelegant. Proceed with caution.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

And done. Not going to submit it right away though. Wanna look it over with fresh eyes.

I'm happy with this one to a degree I only have been with Starry-Eyes

[Keld Denar]

That is how I would do it too but I would not call it elegant -you do it for power

ToB is a little tricky. A person who is inexperienced might see something like:
X4/Swordsage1/Y6/Swordsage1
and think, "man, thats kinda messy"

But when you really get down and look at it, its a juggling act with IL. In this example, he'll have an IL of 3 at the first dip, allowing 1st or 2nd level manevuers, and an IL of 7 for the second dip, allowing for a 4th level manevuer (which are REALLY good) and a choice of 3rd level stances (which are mostly better than 1st level ones).

If he had instead done:
X3/Swordsage2/Y10
I'd take a look at the IL, realize that he's still only got an IL of 2 at the first dip, and the second level would still pin him into a 1st level stance. That's very ineligant. Grouping =! Elegant. Elegance, at least as I see it, is synergy between abilities and logical placement of levels and timing of abilities. Getting the right abilities at the right time. ToB splashes are always about placement, rather than grouping. A build with 4 levels of Swordsage in a block is argueably LESS elegant in that way, not to mention less powerful, than a build that has 4 levels splashed throughout it in 2 or 6 non-IL classes in between levels.

Just something to think about. I've seen judges in the past mark builds down for "jumping around" by taking 2 levels here, 1 level there, and going back and taking more levels another place, without looking deeper to realize that they were trying to reach certain IL thresholds to get certain manevuers, or certain spell levels to get certain feats or time it to get a certain ability along with a feat that uses that ability. X5/Y10/Z5 is no more elegant than X2/Y1/Z4/X+2/Q6/V3/Y+2. Saying it is is a falsehood (IMO) since a character doesn't know his class levels or that he's not simultaneously learning 2 sets of abilities at the same time (that only manifest seperately due to the stratiated nature of levels).

Thats one of the reasons it takes me so freakin long to judge entries. I look deeper then just the level breakdown, because there is often a lot of good reasoning why things are like they are. Again, this is my judging style, and others have a right to their own. Just wanted to make it clear.

[OMG PONIES]

Grouping =! Elegant. Elegance, at least as I see it, is synergy between abilities and logical placement of levels and timing of abilities. Getting the right abilities at the right time.

This. So much this. I'm always surprised that I don't see Tome of Battle used as more of a garnish in builds--a dash here, a sprig there. It can be used for so many different niches and bonuses, depending on both the material used and the timing.

I'm happy with this one to a degree I only have been with Starry-Eyes

This both excites and frightens me--I think that level of personal satisfaction usually translates well in the judges' scores. I like my builds, but not as much as I liked Milo--I wanted to run out and play him at my gaming table. Incidentally, the crunch for all three builds is done. Now it's just time to format the entries and create an actual backstory out of the vignettes I've got floating in my brain.

[Akal Saris]

Actually, my favorite of the builds that I've made was one of the less popular ones with the judges (the Cancer Mage), so I don't know if it transfers over so well.

[Amphetryon]

Actually, my favorite of the builds that I've made was one of the less popular ones with the judges (the Cancer Mage), so I don't know if it transfers over so well.

Know what you mean. I liked my Birdlord at least as well as I liked my Stonelord, and they placed vastly differently.